W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2009

Re: EU FP Ontology projects

From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@pioneerca.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 11:59:05 -0800
Message-ID: <8BD48FC668634E50A9A3D0C75D7C46B7@rhm8200>
To: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@pioneerca.com>, "Azamat" <abdoul@cytanet.com.cy>
Cc: "'SW-forum'" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>, "KR-language" <KR-language@YahooGroups.com>
BlankAzamat said

I wonder how  can it cover many different views with such 
a narrow reading of relationship, knowledge, and context? 

I neglected to make a very important point.
This entity-characteristic-proposition hierarchy

begin hierarchy tabula rasa;
   /    entity; # physical Entity
   /    group;  # abstract Entity
   /    characteristic;  # property
   //       attribute;
   //       part;
   ///          context;
   ///          sentence;
   //       relation;
   //       action;
   //       interaction;
   /    proposition;

   /    statement;
   /    question;
   /    command;
   /    assignment;
   /    production;
   /    conditional;
   /    iteration;
   /    quantification;
end hierarchy tabula rasa;

is my preferred hierarchy.

But the mKR/mKE system can dynamically 
transform tabula rasa into another hierarchy
by concept integration and differentiation,
or it can use your favorite hierarchy instead.

Dick McCullough
Ayn Rand do speak od mKR done;
mKE do enhance od Real Intelligence done;
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;

(image/gif attachment: Blank_Bkgrd.gif)

Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 20:00:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:10 UTC